Skip to main content

Ideology Vs Experience

A few weeks ago I witnessed a battle. One between ideology and experience. The debate was about communism (or maybe socialism?). Two friends came to the table with what seems an innocuous discussion about what "lived" communism was about. It was interesting because both parties had a different conception of what communism is. One, whose family had labored under a corrupt communist regime and another whose family for generations had believed enough in the ideology to give up their privileges for common good.
This instance, in retrospect provided me with an interesting lens on what the dialectic within the communist culture would be like. It seems almost akin to the debate within religion that between ideology and experience; between the goodness of all things spiritual and the perversity of human nature. It seems to me that socialism and communism are parallel to the concept of philanthropy in religion and religious fundamentalism.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Purdue's Professional Revolutionary

In light of the discussion we had during our advisee meeting on Friday about being strategic in our means as critical scholars I was struck by the words of Lenin who emphasizes the role of the intellectual. He says, "The history of all countries shows that the working class, exclusively by its own effort, is able to develop only trade-union consciousness, i.e., it may itself realize the necessity for combining in unions, for fighting against the employers and for striving to compel the government to pass necessary labor legislation, etc. The theory of socialism, however, grew out of the philosophic, historical representatives of the propertied classes, the intellectuals." (pg. 74) This idea of the bourgeois socialist intelligentsia as an instrument of raising consciousness and fomenting dissent is an ideal one I am sure but in contemporary times we, the academics, forming a substantial part of the "intellectual elite", occupy a unique position which forces us into ...

Echoing Malcom

Reading Malcolm X's speeches, it is clear that he points to a historical trend in the process of obtaining independence from tyranny. In other words, history shows that people must be committed to overhauling the system and prepared to sacrifice for a great cause. The trouble comes in overcoming the anesthetization of the natural impulse that people have to change their surroundings. I feel that this is incredibly difficult in the modern world when entire industries have been created for the sole purpose of distraction and self-indulgence. Has that impulse changed? Is it still there? Sometimes I think that when people become so self-absorbed and ignorant of rampant injustice, they will only react when its too late. For instance, there have always been economic disparities but public anger only sets in when their houses are foreclosed and savings wiped out. Revolution then becomes the last refuge of the hopeless. Is there any point to calling for revolution when the only precursor t...